Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: Ed Vette on May 16, 2024, 04:58:45 PMReally, why?

Everybody is saying they are ugly, so I want one.

Can you buy them yet?

I agree Goff is not elite.  I am just not sure what alternative they had. 


If the team offers less and he rejects then what?  Franchise tag?  That kills your cap immediately and only lasts year.  So another tag the following year?  Rinse and repeat?

Do they tell him to walk?  Or trade him?

If so who is the replacement?  The team is on an excellent trajectory, if they opt to not keep Goff that changes everything, and if that doesnt work out, the GM and HC will be out of a job. 

Off the top of my head the closest thing I can think of is Washington and Minnesota saying goodbye to Cousins because they didn't feel he was worth it.  Hasnt worked out too well for Washington, the Vikings remains to be seen

Quote from: MightyGiants on May 16, 2024, 08:56:38 AMI agree.   The first thing I always look for is the bye.   Ideally you want that at the middle (or later) in the schedule-  check

I look for any killer stretches, I don't see that

Finally (and this is just my preference), I look for a minimum of prime-time games.  At three, that's about as low as one can expect as a Giants fan.

Very true.  If this team ever gets a good as we hope, its likely there will be 5 primetime games per year.

Quote from: MightyGiants on May 16, 2024, 08:52:48 AMI suspect there will be less griping about this than there was with Peacock (or even Amazon) owing to the popularity and vastly larger Netflix subscriber base.

I feel like Amazon would have more subscribers than Netflix, but you may be right.  I know some people just don't stream and if their cable company doesn't provide access to the app, then they don't know how to get it.  I just figure 100,000,000 Prime subscriptions means a lot of people have prime video

Quote from: LennG on May 15, 2024, 08:44:15 PMMe also. But the point being, in a nutshell--WHY"

Why, when we already had the worst OL in the league, was this not addressed, even to the point of bringing in one quality guy to show fans that they are trying?
Yes, these new and hopefully, improved guys, maybe better than last year's crop (they certainly can't be worse), it just boggles my mind that we again are predicted to be at the bottom of the barrel, and management either doesn't care or is sluffing off on their jobs.

I think they feel the did address it and they couldn't dump even more resources into a position group that they have already dumped multiple high 1st round picks, several mid to late round picks and almost 10 FAs in the last 2 years. 

They also changed coaches. At some point personnel resources have yo be used for the rest of the team.

Two Thursdays unusual and against the same team, even more so.  At least that way one is at home. 

2 teams breaking in QBs in weeks 1 and 2, hope that "attacking" defense is ready as those games are probably the best opportunities for victories in the 1st half of the season.

Should spur some interesting  and enlightening debate when people realize this.

Quote from: LennG on May 15, 2024, 07:32:35 PMWhen I started this thread it was about the OL and, as usual, it has ended up being a referendum on Daniel Jones, like most other threads.

If anyone cares, what about our 'new and impr oved' OL? Is PFF right and do we still have the worst OL in the league or have we made some significant improvements to make it, at least, average?

Lenn,

I am not surprised by the ranking.  The Giants offseason additions were not top echelon guys.  Thomas is the only guy on the line with any credentials for "rankings". 

I think if they had traded for or signed a pro-bowl caliber OL they might have been ranked higher.  They signed a lot of mediocrity and added that to  a group that mostly rated worse than mediocre.

I don't know if they will be better.  I think they could be.  It seemed like most of the signees were better pass blockers than run blockers.  Maybe they can find one thing they do well and have an identity.  That would be an improvement in my opinion. Last year they couldn't run or pass block.  If they pass block well, they might be able to set up the run via the pass.

I'll believe it when it I see it.

From reading through this thread it seems like most are of the opinion that Robinson will not provide much production but will help young WRs with his leadership. 

He had 34 receptions last year for 280 yards.  9 of his catches were for 1st downs, which is something I guess.

Does he play special teams? If not, does this seem similar to having Sterling Shepard on the roster last year? 

Bottom roster spots are usually guys who play STs.

I for one am shocked that this OL which yielded a historic # of sacks last year is rated the worst in preseason.

Hopefully the FAs they added can bring enough to the table to help bring this group to at least middle of the road.

Quote from: Ed Vette on May 14, 2024, 12:32:45 PMThe absence of a solid 3T and two Receivers who will struggle in Run Support is somewhat concerning for me. Zone coverage will require the ILB's to have Coverage responsibilities. Read and React. I hope it doesn't take three games to get up to speed.

Do you see McFadden as a good fit for this system?

Quote from: Ed Vette on May 13, 2024, 03:54:19 PMI all comes down to positional responsibilities. The 3/4 Mike has more coverage responsibilities and the 3/4 Edge do not. That's why I separate the LB's from the DLine. I am curious if Thibs and Burn have the sand in their pants to transition to DE responsibility. If so, the Giants are a 3 Tech away. Simmons would be my Will and McFadden my Sam.

Ed,

I get your point, and I think Thibs and Burns are going to spend considerable more time trying to be get in the backfield then in coverage.  I could be wrong, but from what Daboll has said about being more of an "attacking" defense, I am guessing those guys will be deployed mostly as penetrators. 

Burns did not grade out as a good run defender which, for me, is why your question/point is a good one. 

I can't help but see another Buffalo similarity here.  Buffalo's DL likes to get up field and disrupt.  And they have mostly been good at it.  Seems like that's the direction Daboll wants this D to go.

Quote from: Philosophers on May 14, 2024, 10:30:35 AMPick whatever names you want.  Kevin Boss, Billy Ard, Jim Burt, etc.  The point is mid-late round picks who developed and became good starting players.

Well I would start with actual Giants mid-round picks and not FAs or 2nd round picks.   Sorry if my point upset you.

I also feel like when Reese was GM fans weren't calling it a development issue but a drafting issue.  He had a streak of poor 3rd rounders that never contributed and I don't recall anyone saying it was development.

There is one factor over the last 10 years that I think has probably had an effect on development - the carousel of coaching changes.  Players drafted in the mid to late rounds are drafted with a development plan in mind.  When their is new coaches in place 2 years later, they won't look at that player the same or have a role in mind for them. 

Larry,

That's one of the reasons I wish they would have graded the front 7 as a group and not had Burns and Thibodeaux as OLBs.  Seems like they used "base" defense lineups to grade this even though teams are in "base" less than 30% of the time.